Barnett, M. (2006). Using a web-based professional development system to support preservice teachers in examining authentic classroom practice. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 14(4), 701-729.

Beitzel, B. D., & Derry, S. J. (2009). When the book is better than the movie: How contrasting video cases influence text learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(3), 337-355. doi: 10.2190/EC.40.3.e

Berg, E. v. d., Jansen, L., & Blijleven, P. (2004). Learning with multimedia cases: An evaluation study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(4), 491-509.

Bryan, L. A., & Recesso, A. (2006). Promoting reflection among science student teachers using a web-based video analysis tool. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(1), 31-39.

Burden, R., Tinnerman, L., Lunce, L., & Runshe, D. (2010). Video case studies: Preparing teachers for inclusion. TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, 6(4)

Cannings, T. R., & Talley, S. (2002). Multimedia and online video case studies for preservice teacher preparation. Education and Information Technologies, 7(4), 359-367. doi: 10.1023/A:1020969723060

Fong, C., & Woodruff, E. (2003). Web-based video and frame theory in the professional development of teachers: Some implications for distance education. Distance Education, 24(2), 195-211.

Harris, R. C., Pinnegar, S., & Teemant, A. (2005). The case for hypermedia video ethnographies: Designing a new class of case studies that challenge teaching practice. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 141-161.

Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E., & Bencze, L. (2003). New applications for multimedia cases: Promoting reflective practice in preservice teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(4), 483-500.

Kale, U., & Whitehouse, P. (2012). Structuring video cases to support future teachers’ problem solving. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(3), 177-204.

Kalyuga, S. (2007). Enhancing instructional efficiency of interactive E-learning environments: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 387-399. doi: 10.1007/s10648-007-9051-6

Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. (2008). Grounded design of web-enhanced case-based activity. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(2), 161-179. doi: 10.1007/s11423-006-9010-9

Kim, S., Phillips, W. R., Pinsky, L., Brock, D., Phillips, K., & Keary, J. (2006). A conceptual framework for developing teaching cases: A review and synthesis of the literature across disciplines. Medical Education, 40(9), 867-876. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02544.x

Knight, S. L., Pedersen, S., & Peters, W. (2004). Connecting the university with a professional development school: Pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward the use of compressed video. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 139-154.

Krueger, K., Boboc, M., Smaldino, S., Cornish, Y., & Callahan, W. (2004). InTime impact report. what was InTime’s effectiveness and impact on faculty and preservice teachers? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 185-210.

Kurz, T. L., Batarelo, I., & Middleton, J. A. (2009). Examining elementary preservice teachers’ perspectives concerning curriculum themes for video case integration. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(4), 461-485. doi: 10.1007/s11423-009-9110-4

Kurz, T. T. L., Llama, G., & Savenye, W. (2004). Issues and challenges of creating video cases to be used with preservice teachers. TechTrends, 49(4), 67-73.

Kurz, T., & Batarelo, I. (2010). Constructive features of video cases to be used in teacher education. TechTrends, 54(5), 46-53. doi: 10.1007/s11528-010-0436-x

Kurz, T., Batarelo, I., & Middleton, J. (2009). Examining elementary preservice teachers’ perspectives concerning curriculum themes for video case integration. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(4), 461-485. doi: 10.1007/s11423-009-9110-4

Moreno, R., & Ortegano-Layne, L. (2008). Do classroom exemplars promote the application of principles in teacher education? A comparison of videos, animations, and narratives. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(4), 449-465. doi: 10.1007/s11423-006-9027-0

Nirula, L., & Peskin, J. (2008). Bringing expert teachers into the educational psychology classroom: Using video-captured insights in case study analysis. Teaching Educational Psychology, 3(1), 1-23.

Olkun, S., Altun, A., & Deryakulu, D. (2009). Development and evaluation of a case-based digital learning tool about children’s mathematical thinking for elementary school teachers (L-TEST). European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(2), 151-165.

Rich, P. J., & Hannafin, M. (2009). Video annotation tools: Technologies to scaffold structure, and transform teacher reflection. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 52-67. doi: 10.1177/0022487108328486

Sherin, M. G., & Van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers’ ability to notice classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475-491.

Sykes, G., & Bird, T. (1992). Teacher education and the case idea. Review of Research in Education, 18, 457-521.

Wang, J., & Hartley, K. (2003). Video technology as a support for teacher education reform. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 105-138.

Wouters, P., Tabbers, H., & Paas, F. (2007). Interactivity in video-based models. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 327-342. doi: 10.1007/s10648-007-9045-4

Yadav, A. (2008). What works for them? preservice teachers’ perceptions of their learning from video cases. Action in Teacher Education, 29(4), 27-38.

Yadav, A., Bouck, E., Da Fonte, A., & Patton, S. (2009). Instructing special education pre-service teachers through literacy video cases. Teaching Education, 20(2), 149-162. doi: 10.1080/10476210902878510

Yung, B. H., Yip, V. W., Lai, C., & Lo, F. Y. (2010). Towards a model of effective use of video for teacher professional development. International Seminar, Professional Reflections, National Science Learning Centre, York.

I built a 3D puzzle inspired by the Endover sculpture. The video that follows shows the puzzle being created on an Up! 3D printer. The pieces of the puzzle were built in FabLab ModelMaker and, when fabricated, combine to form a cube like Endover (see 00:48 to skip to the the final cube).

I envision a couple of engineering tasks hidden within the replication of a scaled, puzzle-like version of Endover. These engineering tasks may or may not be appropriate for elementary students, but I am currently in the brainstorming/prototyping phase. My partner teacher, Paula White, wants to develop some lessons that focus on spatial visualization, surface area, and volume.

1. The creation of a 3D puzzle that, when completed, forms a cube. Paula White and I have developed a preliminary activity that uses colored cm cubes to scaffold the creation of digital and physical puzzles like the one in the video.
2. The creation of a 3d puzzle that, when completed, forms a cube that can balance on one of its vertices. This would definitely be an advanced engineering design task, because it focuses on both the parts as well as additional design criteria and scientific concepts like gravity and friction.

In the meantime, I need to figure out if I can create an Endover puzzle that can balance on a vertex. The one in the video does not!

I put my design on Thingiverse if you want to 3D print a version of your own.



Use the “Previous” and “Next” buttons to navigate to the following spots in the video.

1. “Print and Cut” Button
2. Place Card Stock on Carrier Sheet
3. Load Carrier Sheet into the 2D Fabricator
4. Final Configuration Check
5. Detect Registration Marks
6. Initiate Cutting
7. Eject Carrier Sheet
8. Peel Carrier Sheet from Card Sheet

Slater Harrison (aka, The Science Toy Maker) offers the following  activities on his website, Science Toy Maker:

• Static Electricity Flyers: The scientific magic of hovering grocery bags seems like a fun way to explain static electricity and positive/negative charges.
• Walkalong Gliders:  Explore aerodynamic lift with gliders that seem to never land.
• Put-Put Boats: Although metal cans, scissors, and fire are potential hazards, building a put-put boat connects to physics and steam engines.  Plus it is pretty cool.

Arvind Gupta talked about his creations during a TED talk, and he provides examples and instructions on his Toys from Trash page:

• Straw Pump: Build a simple water pump using straws, beads, and small metal balls.
• Floating Forks: Can you make two forks balance on a toothpick?  Arvind can show you how…
• Paper Protractor: Create more than a dozen different angles by folding a square sheet of paper.

This post also appears on the Make to Learn blog.

I finished a working prototype set of gears this afternoon. The gears in the video were fabricated from a single sheet of card stock and fastened to a folded card stock base with two brass fasteners. I fabricated the gears and base using a computerized 2D die-cut machine and basic software that is included with the machine. The intricacy of the gears almost necessitates computer-controlled precision versus the varying results of scissors.

Total Materials: Two sheets of card stock (gears and base) and two brass fasteners

Questions:

1. Do the gears spin in the same direction? Kind of obvious.
2. How many different ratio relationships can you identify? Not so obvious. You need to think about more than the gears’ teeth.
3. The blades on a wind turbine produce energy that is converted to electricity through a generator. Would you attach the blades to gear A or gear B? Not obvious without the context of wind turbines. You probably need some additional information. Nevertheless, logic will likely lead you to a reasonable guess.
4. If it took me 12 seconds to spin gear A in the video, gear A spins at what RPM?
5. If it took me 12 seconds to spin gear A in the video, gear B spins at what RPM?

• Building things
• Making things
• Doing things

My biggest takeaways came from the first reference- Barron et al. (1998).

Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3/4, Learning through Problem Solving), 271-311.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 369-398.

Boakes, N. J. (2009). Origami instruction in the middle school mathematics classroom: Its impact on spatial visualization and geometry knowledge of students. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 32(7), 1-12.

Casey, B. M., Andrews, N., Schindler, H., Kersh, J. E., Samper, A., & Copley, J. (2008). The development of spatial skills through interventions involving block building activities. Cognition & Instruction, 26(3), 269-309. doi:10.1080/07370000802177177

Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2005). Math play. Scholastic Parent & Child, 12(4), 36-45.

Hungwe, K. N., Sorby, S., & Drummer, T. (2007). Preparing K-12 students for engineering studies by improving 3-D spatial skills. International Journal of Learning, 14(2), 127-135.

Jeon, K. (2009). Mathematics hiding in the nets for a cube. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15(7), 394-399.

Petrosino, A. J. (1998). At-risk children’s use of reflection and revision in hands-on experimental activities. (Unpublished Ph.D.). Vanderbilt University, United States -Tennessee. (9827617)

Reeder, S. (2007). Bubbles, bubbles: Integrated investigations with floating spheres. Science Activities, 44(1), 6-9.

Resnick, M., Bruckman, A., & Martin, F. (1996). Pianos not stereos: Creating computational construction kits. Interactions, 3(5), 40-50.

Rule, A. C., Lockhart, A. K., Darrah, F., & Lindell, L. A. (2010). Cereal box dioramas of native american cultures: A collaborative project. Social Studies Research and Practice, 5(1), 119-130.

Tangdhanakanond, K., Pitiyanuwat, S., & Archwamety, T. (2006). Assessment of achievement and personal qualities under constructions learning environment. Education, 126(3), 495-503.

Verhaegh, J., Resing, W. C. M., Jacobs, A. P. A., & Fontijn, W. F. J. (2009). Playing with blocks or with the computer? solving complex visual-spatial reasoning tasks: Comparing children’s performance on tangible and virtual puzzles. Educational & Child Psychology, 26(3), 18-29.

Printable Instructions
Step Pop-Up Template
Lesson Plan
Step Pop-Up Activity Sheet
Step Pop-Up Answer Sheet

Use this shortlink, Willy. http://tinyurl.com/StepPop-Up

My Drawdio kit just arrived via snail mail, and I am thinking that I will wait until tomorrow morning to begin playing with it. The kit, mind you, came with no instructions and a bunch of parts despite the claim that it was a working, tested unit. (Cough) Engineers (Cough). Luckily ladyada has a relatively helpful manual…

I am thinking that I might craft a couple of lessons about measurement that use a drawdio-equipped pencil. Measurement is a consistently problematic area of math for the teachers/students with whom I work. I am imagining a mixture of art, music, and math! Science would be the glue.

2Designing for a Children’s Engineering Community of Practice
Tuesday, 6/28/2011, 10:00am–12:00pm
Building/Room: PACC Broad St Atrium , Table: 25

3Fabrication Systems: Engaging Elementary and Middle School Students in Construction
Tuesday, 6/28/2011, 4:00pm–6:00pm
Building/Room: PACC Broad St Atrium, Table: 3

4Programming & Robotics Playground
Wednesday, 6/29/2011, 9 am–1 pm
Features students creating games for learning using Scratch and USFIRST teams from the Philadelphia area demonstrating robotics. Come, enjoy, and learn about these creative student activities! Sponsored by ISTE’s SIGCT.

5Fab@School: Desktop Manufacturing and Children’s Engineering in the Elementary Classroom
Wednesday, 6/29/2011, 11:45am–12:45pm PACC 107B

Exhibitors:
Fablevision: 1513
Canon: 2239